This template is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
Palestinian people and the State of Palestine on Wikipedia. Join us by visiting the project page, where you can add your name to the list of members where you can contribute to the discussions.PalestineWikipedia:WikiProject PalestineTemplate:WikiProject PalestinePalestine-related articles
Except in very narrow and specific contexts, using Wikipedia's voice to call a war or conflict "Operation this or that", i.e. by the partisan name given to it by only one side, as opposed to the internationally-known one, or at least a non-partisan descriptive one, is a problem re NPOV. It usually arises re most wars and conflicts that Wikipedia includes articles about, not just those in the I/P area, and it always needs to be corrected.
The name and title parameters navbox parameters used in this template were both listed as "Operation Cast Lead", and the title parameter was wikilinked to that name, which is a redirect to Gaza War. I asked about this at the help desk since I'm unfamiliar with how templates work, with help from them it's now in an NPOV form. Redirects should not be use to circumvent the display of an article's consensus-based name. Please leave this as it it, in proper NPOV and policy-based form. – OhioStandard (talk)
Background entries appear to fail NPOV
Wow, it never really occurred to me before that a navbox could violate NPOV, but the background section of this looks like it's a strong candidate. It lists these wikilinks, in this order:
Rocket and mortar attacks on southern Israel
List of rocket and mortar attacks in Israel in 2001 through 2007
List of rocket and mortar attacks in Israel in 2008
This gives the impression that Palestinians in Gaza just unilaterlly started lobbing rockets into Israel, with zero history or provocation that preceded that, and that their unilateral aggression in doing so is what started the war. Somehow I suspect that this might not be the most scrupulously candid presentation we could offer our readers. – OhioStandard (talk) 12:13, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
